Críticas y políticas del lenguaje

Oliver, Volschenk and Smit (2010:1) investigated the level of WTP a premium for electricity from renewable energy of residential households in South Africa’s Cape Peninsula. This study is currently the most in-depth study in its field done in South Africa during the past ten years. Oliver et al. (2010:1) used recent contributions in the literature on norm-motivated behaviour to identify factors that could influence residential consumers’ WTP.

Using previous literature, Oliver et al. (2010:3) created a model which they adapted from the model of Salmela and Varho (2006:10). They then based their questionnaire on this revised model shown in Figure 4.17.

Figure 4.17 indicates drivers of WTP that were considered important for this study (shown in black outline), while certain other drivers were excluded for varying reasons (shown in grey). The factors used by Oliver and his partners (2010:2) are summarised below:

Psychological and psychographic indicators of WTP. Psychographic characteristics include aspects such as:

 Knowledge/awareness,

 Values,

 Attitudes,

 Concern for the environment, and

 Perceptions of the effectiveness of particular interventions, namely: o consumers’ perception of effectiveness,

o income and price, o free-rider behaviour,

o feedback about consumer behaviour,

o mandatory quotas and their effect on WTP for additional green electricity, and o source of green electricity.

A significant positive link between household income and WTP for green electricity exists, contrary to the findings of some previous studies. Oliver et al. (2010) further found that higher income households are more likely to pay a premium, as well as be willing to pay a bigger premium. They also established that the view of green electricity as reliable, involvement in the recycling of waste, and the belief that everyone should contribute to green electricity generation, drive the consumers’ WTP (Oliver et al., 2010:1).

A 2015 study conducted by Chan, Oerlemans, and Volschenk in South Africa, did not aim to determine a representative estimation of the willingness to pay of South African consumers. The main purpose of their study was to test the construct validity of contingent valuation method. Chan et al. (2015) considered two dimensions of construct validity, namely: convergent and theoretical validity. They used the theory of planned behaviour to build two regression models, namely: double-bounded dichotomous choice and open-ended measures. The sample for their study comprised of 890 postgraduate students of two South African universities (Chan et al., 2015:321-327).

The research found that the two elicitation methods yielded significantly different results. Chan et al. (2015:327) concluded that some free-riding behaviour may have occurred as the respondents were aware that green electricity would be provided on a voluntary basis, which may have led to a misstatement of the open-ended WTP value. Differences between the two measures may have occurred due to the higher complexity of the open-ended WTP measure. It is easier for respondents to answer the double-bounded dichotomous choice WTP question because the respondents did not have to state a value estimate, as a specific value was offered. There are more methods to estimate willingness to pay a premium for green electricity and there are reasons to believe that similar issues are at play with other elicitation methods. Based on their findings, they

concluded that for various reasons open-ended and dichotomous choice, and several other, elicitation methods tend to overestimate willingness to pay values (Chan et al., 2015:321-327). De Villiers (2010:5) conducted a survey on businesses in the Western and Northern Cape of South Africa to determine (1) whether businesses would be willing to pay a premium for green electricity; (2) why they would be willing to buy it; (3) which factors influence the purchasing decision; and (4) what barriers exist that will deter a purchase. The results of this study on medium to small businesses located in the area of study are summarised in the Table 4.5. De Villiers (2010:53) summarised the top three results for the following categories: Motivators, Factors, Barriers and Responsibility and finance.

According to De Villiers (2010:17), businesses can enter into long-term contracts and negotiate a good price which can then translate into cost-effective marketing utilities. Most businesses believe the most important reason for buying green electricity would be the enhancement of their corporate image, and coupled with their social responsibility, other advantages are to (De Villiers, 2010:29):  Emit less pollution;

 Contribute to sustainability of the environment;  Incur a cost saving eventually; and

 Promote health (through prevention of pollution).

De Villiers (2010:20) referred to the studies done by Nielson (2002) and Nielsen (2004), indicating that the greatest disadvantages for South African businesses were the perceived cost premium and the unreliability of green electricity.

Table 4.5: Summary of the survey results of businesses in the Western Cape and Northern Cape regarding green electricity

All respondents Ranking [1=highest]

Ranking [1=highest]

Organisations more likely to purchase green electricity

Mot

iva

to

rs

The shareholders of your company are concerned about climate change

1 1 Your company upholds a

responsibility to be community leaders with regards to green energy

Your company feels a strong commitment to public health and the environment

2 2 The shareholders of your company are concerned about climate change

A ‘green’ public image is important for your company

3 3 Employees have more pride in a company that is giving back to the environment

F

ac

to

rs

Green products must be officially certified and endorsed by an accredited organisation

1 1 Your money will contribute towards constructing new renewable generation Companies would receive a

physical certificate

2 2 Companies would receive a physical certificate

Your money will contribute towards constructing new renewable generation

3 3 Certificates tradable

Bar

rier

s

The extra cost of green electricity is the main reason why your company would not purchase green electricity

1 1 The extra cost of green electricity is the main reason why your company would not purchase green electricity

There is insufficient information about the true environmental benefits of green electricity

2 2 There is insufficient information about the true environmental benefits of green electricity The internal resistance by key

decision-makers is the main reason why your company would not purchase green electricity

3 3 The internal resistance by key decision-makers is the main reason why your company would not purchase green electricity

Respo n sibilit y a n d f inan c

e Pollution by companies should _{be taxed or more stringently} regulated

1 1 Power utilities should be required to include a minimum percentage of green energy in their energy mix

Power utilities should be required to include a minimum percentage of green energy in their energy mix

2 2 All large companies should be required to include a minimum percentage of green energy in their electricity mix

All large companies should be required to include a minimum percentage of green energy in their electricity mix

3 3 The electricity price should be increased to facilitate finance for green energy projects

Eskom conducted a green power marketing study in 2002. Van Heerden et al. (2002:3) focused on the following objectives:

 Conduct a literature scan of international initiatives.

 Obtain a first-pass assessment of market sentiment towards the concept of green power.  Suggest a possible green power marketing methodology suitable for South Africa.

 Conduct an EPRI-supported workshop (Electric Power Research Institute) with line group representatives to explore the green power concept within Eskom.

 Make recommendations for the next actions required.

Van Heerden et al. (2002:3) conducted a literature study detailing current green power marketing programmes in Europe and the USA. The successes or failures of these initiatives were documented, as well as trends emanating from analyses of these initiatives. They also conducted a consumer survey in a two-phased approach. Phase 1 comprised focus group discussions with residential consumers and wine farmers, followed by Phase 2 comprised of telephonic and in- depth interviews with industrial consumers.

Van Heerden et al. (2002:3) summarised the international green power initiatives of the USA and the EU based on the following three basic types of programmes that are currently being implemented in the USA:

 Contribution Programme: Consumers contribute to a utility-managed fund for renewable project development, with a minimum contribution level set by the utility.

 Capacity-based Programme: Fixed blocks of capacity generated using renewables are offered to consumers at a premium (ranging from $3 to $6.59/100 W).

 Energy-based Programmes: Consumers have an option of buying a percentage of their electricity supply from renewable sources. Premiums charged vary from 0.4c/kWh to 20.0c/kWh , with a median of 2.5c/kWh .

Green power activities vary considerably across the EU member states (Van Heerden et al., 2002:4). Some of the incentive schemes, found within the various countries, are as follows:

 Investment subsidies: These are divided into subsidies on renewable energy capacity and on renewable energy output. Generally, higher subsidies are given to promote the development of less commercial technologies.

 Feed-in tariffs: These tariffs implicate subsidies on output, in the form of guaranteed prices, in combination with a purchase obligation by the utilities. These schemes have been successful in promoting the deployment of renewable energy sources.

 Bidding systems: This is the provision of limited subsidies on capacity produced, which is awarded to only a limited number of developers. The developers have to compete for the subsidies through a bidding system, facilitating the reduction of the cost of generation.

 Voluntary green pricing: Utility consumers pay a premium on their electricity to develop renewables for personal reasons.

 Fiscal instruments: This is mostly based around the tax systems. The formats range from rebates on general energy taxes, rebates from special emission taxes, and proposals or lower value-added tax rates, to tax exemption for green funds, and favourable depreciation schemes.

 Green certificates: The main objective of the tradable green certificates is to stimulate the penetration of green electricity in the electricity market. Green certificates are mainly applied where conditions are imposed by governments and a demand is created by legislation.